> vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT)
> According to the European Medicines Agency, about 900 VITT cases have been reported after immunization with the AstraZeneca or J&J vaccines in Europe, including 200 deaths. Few data are available about the rest of the world, even though more than 3 billion doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were administered globally.
> It’s not clear whether the syndrome was rarer outside Europe or whether cases were missed. In most parts of the world, between 40% and 60% of the population has the genetic background that makes people more prone to VITT, but in East Asia the prevalence is only 20%. Other factors, too, might contribute to the rare cases when they happen.
This is such a crazy fact. I didn't know the AstraZeneca was administered at that scale. I remember the quick switch to the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine previsely as precautionary because of the AstraZeneca shot. Our (Romanian) army personal was mostly the one subjected to this vaccine.
It seems that AstraZenaca has become a scapegoat for Pharmaceutical companies, so people can say "oh it was just that one bad vaccine with one rare side effect."
Could you expand on this a bit? I don't think that AstraZeneca has suffered any reputational damage from this, it's an extremely rare event that took broad monitoring to even discover. 200 documented deaths in what are likely hundreds of millions of doses is the type of thing that speaks to a very robust medical monitoring system.
> "oh it was just that one bad vaccine with one rare side effect."
What do reference by the "it" here? There were 1.2 million COVID deaths in the US alone which seems like the most notable "it" to reference but it doesn't really fit with the rest of the sentence.
on a cultural level id compare the covid vaccine mandate to conscription , "risk your life for the greater good else face ostracization" , a fair challenge to this idea is that disproportionate death rates are being compared , but the social aspect is similar enough that i expect down votes for merely daring to discuss the concept
You face resistance for an inflammatory and incorrect framing, not for talking about vaccine safety. Everybody was talking about the safety of vaccines, which is why many governments moved away from this vaccine in favor of others.
To complain about downvotes you should realize that people are reading your entire comment, not just the bland non-controversial parts. Playing a fake victim might be good for your feelings but it's bad for examining the truth.
"Everybody was talking about the safety of vaccines"
Every platform on earth Shadow Banned and blocked people if you said anything other than "Safe and Effective"... Real conversation was shut down on a nation state level. Not exactly a scientific or logical way to discuss experimental injectable therapeutics.
> Every platform on earth Shadow Banned and blocked people if you said anything other than "Safe and Effective"...
Absolutely false. Safety of this vaccine was talked about all over. I did it, and I was never shadow banned.
Somehow there was enough discussion of this specific vaccine to enable a recall, even!
Search the news and it was all over at the time, found a ton of articles just now with a web search. There's so much documentary evidence to directly contradict your very weird claims.
If you were shadowbanned, it was either a very rare occurrence, or perhaps you were talking about something else?
ill acknowledge your attacks on my verbal expression. now do you have a rebuttal to the idea that conscription and forced vaccine mandates are comparable ? because all the mrna vaccines have fucked up side effects, moving from one to another isn't a perfect solution. regardless - ive put an idea forth for discussion, what makes you think that accusing me of playing victim is a valid method of discussing things in a productive and non inflammatory way? it seems like youre intentionally trying to bait your opponent, like the engagement bots on reddit.
There's no need to rebutt such a claim, as it's extremely broadly false. The stated level of danger is not comparable, the expectation on effort or time is completely different, the broad negative outcomes of being drafted vs the positive outcomes of a vaccine, none of those are comparable. It would be like saying "rebuke my claim that being drafted is comparable to being asked not to listen to loud music on the bus."
your comment is basically "no" which isn't a great foot hold from which to form rebuttals , i feel like id have to drink different flavors of kool aid to respond adequately , eg if one prioritized national interests over some elderly dying then your point of broad negative vs broad positive outcomes is invalid
> vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT)
> According to the European Medicines Agency, about 900 VITT cases have been reported after immunization with the AstraZeneca or J&J vaccines in Europe, including 200 deaths. Few data are available about the rest of the world, even though more than 3 billion doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were administered globally.
> It’s not clear whether the syndrome was rarer outside Europe or whether cases were missed. In most parts of the world, between 40% and 60% of the population has the genetic background that makes people more prone to VITT, but in East Asia the prevalence is only 20%. Other factors, too, might contribute to the rare cases when they happen.
This is such a crazy fact. I didn't know the AstraZeneca was administered at that scale. I remember the quick switch to the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine previsely as precautionary because of the AstraZeneca shot. Our (Romanian) army personal was mostly the one subjected to this vaccine.
[flagged]
It seems that AstraZenaca has become a scapegoat for Pharmaceutical companies, so people can say "oh it was just that one bad vaccine with one rare side effect."
Could you expand on this a bit? I don't think that AstraZeneca has suffered any reputational damage from this, it's an extremely rare event that took broad monitoring to even discover. 200 documented deaths in what are likely hundreds of millions of doses is the type of thing that speaks to a very robust medical monitoring system.
> "oh it was just that one bad vaccine with one rare side effect."
What do reference by the "it" here? There were 1.2 million COVID deaths in the US alone which seems like the most notable "it" to reference but it doesn't really fit with the rest of the sentence.
on a cultural level id compare the covid vaccine mandate to conscription , "risk your life for the greater good else face ostracization" , a fair challenge to this idea is that disproportionate death rates are being compared , but the social aspect is similar enough that i expect down votes for merely daring to discuss the concept
You face resistance for an inflammatory and incorrect framing, not for talking about vaccine safety. Everybody was talking about the safety of vaccines, which is why many governments moved away from this vaccine in favor of others.
To complain about downvotes you should realize that people are reading your entire comment, not just the bland non-controversial parts. Playing a fake victim might be good for your feelings but it's bad for examining the truth.
"Everybody was talking about the safety of vaccines"
Every platform on earth Shadow Banned and blocked people if you said anything other than "Safe and Effective"... Real conversation was shut down on a nation state level. Not exactly a scientific or logical way to discuss experimental injectable therapeutics.
> Every platform on earth Shadow Banned and blocked people if you said anything other than "Safe and Effective"...
Absolutely false. Safety of this vaccine was talked about all over. I did it, and I was never shadow banned.
Somehow there was enough discussion of this specific vaccine to enable a recall, even!
Search the news and it was all over at the time, found a ton of articles just now with a web search. There's so much documentary evidence to directly contradict your very weird claims.
If you were shadowbanned, it was either a very rare occurrence, or perhaps you were talking about something else?
Well good for you. I’m still permanently banned from Xitter just for explaining what GoF even is.
Im sure it has nothing to do with Allison Fauci being a Twitter systems engineer at the time.
Selective enforcement doesn’t mean it didn’t happen just because you’re still online.
ill acknowledge your attacks on my verbal expression. now do you have a rebuttal to the idea that conscription and forced vaccine mandates are comparable ? because all the mrna vaccines have fucked up side effects, moving from one to another isn't a perfect solution. regardless - ive put an idea forth for discussion, what makes you think that accusing me of playing victim is a valid method of discussing things in a productive and non inflammatory way? it seems like youre intentionally trying to bait your opponent, like the engagement bots on reddit.
There's no need to rebutt such a claim, as it's extremely broadly false. The stated level of danger is not comparable, the expectation on effort or time is completely different, the broad negative outcomes of being drafted vs the positive outcomes of a vaccine, none of those are comparable. It would be like saying "rebuke my claim that being drafted is comparable to being asked not to listen to loud music on the bus."
your comment is basically "no" which isn't a great foot hold from which to form rebuttals , i feel like id have to drink different flavors of kool aid to respond adequately , eg if one prioritized national interests over some elderly dying then your point of broad negative vs broad positive outcomes is invalid
[flagged]